The Covid-19 Pandemic has changed our ways of receiving education and teaching it. Most institutions and schools have had to shut down and migrate to online platforms to accommodate for the rules and guidelines such as social distancing. Many parents and students are frustrated with this change for many reasons. The tuition costs remain the same in some institutions for students who are attending class on campus and for students who are at home. It sparked frustration with many parents and students, which led to concerns for other factors like the quality of online education. Communication is also a substantial part of teaching and learning. How dependable can the instructors be for their students? Tiffany Bourelle and Andy Bourelle introduce a bad idea about writing teachers titled, “Face-to-Face Courses are Superior to Online Courses.” They revealed that parents and students do not believe that online classes benefit education, which has become a common misconception (Bourelle and Bourelle, 352). Tiffany Bourelle and Andy Bourelle concluded that online courses could be as successful as face-to-face (f2f) courses and could also have the potential of becoming better. In some aspects, online learning is already better. There are significant elements that online courses must provide for it to be the best quality of education.

The original concept for online classes was to make learning contents convenient and easily accessible for people who are not available to attend the traditional f2f courses (Bourelle and Bourelle, 351). There are conflicts with schedules between work, school, and other commitments that prevent students from acquiring education. Digital platforms have made it easy for students to overcome these obstacles of conflict and move forward with their degree pathways. Anya Kamenetz, the author of “Chasing the Elusive ‘Quality’ of Online Education,” discloses that students perform better with some type of online component. She also discusses how interaction with instructors can enhance the quality of online learning (Kamenetz). When students are taking f2f classes, they’re already using online sites to communicate with their instructors and peers outside of the classroom. Teachers must be responsive to their students when teaching a fully online course. Interactions with classmates are also easier done online.

Students in writing courses write more in online classes than in f2f classes. The Massachusetts General Hospital Institute of Health Professions (MGHIHP) released an article titled “Benefits and Challenges of Online Instruction.” The authors conveyed that students put in more effort through online classes. Participation levels are higher because online students find more comfort in engaging in discussions than in f2f classes (MGHIHP). Within online writing courses, students don’t only write more but they think more critically too (Bourelle and Bourelle, 354). In any f2f system, students are always quiet throughout the entire class period. You can practically hear the crickets, hence why engagement rates are not high in these traditional style classes.

There are many more reasons why online classes are successful and there are ways to make them better. F2F has defined the quality of education, but we need to “stop comparing online classes with f2f classes,” says the Bourelles. Having a variety of teaching methods helps students identify with their style of learning. Online learning allows students to discover different techniques that work for them. They receive more practice with freewriting, creativity, and processing. Of course, the instructor would need to design the class that could help students perform well academically (Bourelle and Bourelle, 354). The MGHIHP stresses the need for restructuring the online course from the f2f course because of how different the two systems are. The social media platform on the web browser of your laptop looks different in comparison to the app in your mobile phone. They are different types of devices (systems) that require different layouts (course structures) for your enjoyment (education).

Technology is continually changing our daily routines. Online learning platforms are more common now than they have been before. The pandemic has opened eyes to the challenging struggles of online education, but institutions and instructors are working together to change the system regularly to improve their standards. Online education is already better in ways like participation and critical thinking, and it can become elite after upgrading the content delivery and design of the course. This helps students succeed in their writing classes. Digital platforms are booming, and it’s becoming the new way of teaching and grasping knowledge. It’s easy, fast, and efficient. Soon, everyone will have the opportunity to become educated and accomplishing their goals from the comfort of their home.

Citations

Bourelle, Tiffany, and Andy Bourelle. “Face-to-Face Courses Are Superior to Online Courses.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Drew M. Loewe and Cheryl E. Ball, Digital Publishing Institute, 2017, pp. 351–355.

Kamenetz, Anya. NPR, 27 June 2014, www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/06/27/323329818/chasing-the-elusive-quality-in-online-education. 

“Benefits and Challenges of Online Instruction.” MGH Institute of Health Professions, 28 Feb. 2020, www.mghihp.edu/faculty-staff-faculty-compass-teaching/benefits-and-challenges-online-instruction. 

Traditional grading is implemented in the current school system. For Barnes, the author of “Assessment 3.0: Throw out Your Grade Book and Inspire Learning” his bad idea hinges around how grading is not the best measurement of learning. It is a bad idea since a bad grade hurts students confidence leaving them with no motivation to learn (Barnes, Mark. Pg. 12). As a result, students seek a good grade and not growth. His solution is SE2R(summarize, explain, redirect, resubmit) which is based on conversation between the student and teacher. Mitchell R. James an assistant professor and the author of “Grading Has Always Made Writing Better” says, “the bad idea of traditional grading is that the percentage grade communicates little value to a student’s writing(James; R. Mitchell; pg. 255).” They have no understanding of their grade and the teacher has no direct communication with the student. James’s better idea is assessment of student’s writing, free of letter grading through summative and formative evaluation.

The question is, why do teachers depend on grading and not some other strategy? Today there are more children in schools than before (James; R. Mitchell, pg. 256). They come from many different backgrounds and education is accessible to everyone. Education is not limited to only people who are rich even children from underprivileged backgrounds are in school.  Open enrollment in colleges today pressures teachers to use the current grading system for their writing students. Students are only accepted to colleges based on their grade.  

The grading process before modern times was not based around a letter grade or a percentage. “The grading process hinged more on direct contact between student work, course content, the student, and the teacher (James, R. Mitchell; pg. 256).” In an English writing class, there was direct communication between the student and teacher where the teacher communicated with the student by speaking and writing to them. In this way, students could understand the writing content in more detail while improving their writing and have better comprehension in the course. “Student success in an English course depended on demonstrating the skills taught (James, R. Mitchell; pg. 256).” Only when a student demonstrated the skills of reading, writing, and speaking did a student pass the course. No letter grade was involved for a student to pass the English course. This process is called assessment.

Assessment is divided into two parts: summative and formative evaluation (James, R. Mitchell pg. 256). These types of assessment do not use letter grades and focus on a student’s ability to understand the material and to show what they know. “Summative evaluation assesses a student’s ability to meet a priori criteria with no letter grade. (James; R. Mitchel; pg. 257l)”. A set of criterions must be met by the student without a letter grade.

An example of summative evaluation would be a student’s self-reflection on the process of learning and their own self growth throughout the process (James, R. Mitchell pg. 257). A portfolio assessment allows the teacher to set guidelines for what a student’s reflection should consist of such as what should be included in the portfolio, the purpose of it, and the learning process they went through while also showing their work. Communicating what they learned throughout the semester using their own process lets both the student and teacher communicate with feedback.  Teachers can give student’s input of their portfolio and talk to their students and vice versa without regular grading.

The use of formative assessment is based on communication between a student and teacher more than once during the semester. Engaging in conversation will make a student have a part in learning (James; R. Mitchell; pg.257). This encourages students to have the desire to grow in their learning instead of trying to not fail. Learning will be their focus instead of avoiding punishment based on a bad grade. When the power of a grade ceases the search for introspection can begin.  

Professor Mark Barnes the author of “Throw out Your Grade Book and Inspires Learning” shares that most educators use letter grading as the best measurement of learning. This grading system is used in most school systems and this is what they know. Teachers assume that grading is using a letter or percentage. If a student does badly on a writing assignment, then the student will feel as if they failed (Barnes, Mark pg. 10). The label placed on the student is based on a percentage not on their understanding of the material. Seeing the bad grade kills their motivation to improve their writing and decreases their desire to grow (Barnes; Mark; pg. 12). Many teachers manipulate students when they give them work since students are thinking about the grade. Fear of punishment holds them back from improving their writing and their incentive to learn.

SE2R is the proposed solution that Mark Barnes proposed (Barnes; Mark; pg. 34). The model is based on observations of a students work and sharing that with them. Summarizing is the first part of SE2R. Teachers should tell the student/s what they accomplished with their writing. This should be followed with feedback on what they did.  Next, is to explain the written observations of a students’ writing and have a conversation between them. Explaining guidelines of written work is best so students will understand what they need to do. Then teachers should make observations based on the guidelines they made. Redirecting and resubmitting is the last step. To redirect a student to their written work allows them to revisit prior learning so that they can grasp what they learned previously (Barnes; Mark; pg. 38). Giving students a chance to reflect and go back to prior learning should be an opportunity for them to revise their work. “Resubmitting their work allows for further review by the teacher (Barnes; Mark; pg. 38).” Slowing down the process is an opportunity for students to grow in their learning.  

Eliminating grading will not be easy. Many high schools use GPA’s for students to be submitted to universities (Barnes; Mark, pg. 40). There is a high value for a grade. A student’s grade determines their success in high school and if they will be admitted to their school of choice. Eliminating letter grades is possible and can be done. Self-grading by students is a possibility which allows a student to reflect on the work they have done and whether they met the expectations (Barnes; Mark pg. 42). They can tap into their own intellectual ability with the help of their teacher. They can have a conversation with each other and decide the grade that should be given. Conversation and the method of SE2R can help teachers move away from traditional grading to ensure student success and growth.   

Educating teachers of the effect of grading students papers based on a number is essential. They should know the ramifications of grading students and how it affects students. It slows down the process of student’s self-growth and improvement. Having a conversation about their work fosters an understanding of improvement and how they can grow. Assessing a student based on the criteria the students meet and their understanding of what they know is superior to grading. The grade of a student on their writing assignment or in general does not foster an understanding of what they did.

Works Cited

1. Barnes, Mark, “Assessment 3.0: Throw Out Your Grade Book and Inspire Learning.” Published by Corwin, 2015. Web. Sage Knowledge; Online pub date 2019; 4^th; Feb. Thousand Oaks, CA; web. http://sk.sagepub.com/books/assessment-3/i184.xml
2. James, R. Mitchell; “Grading Has Always Made Writing Better.” Edited by Ball E. Cheryl and Loewe M. Drew in Bad “Ideas About Writing.” Pgs. (255-257). West Virginia University Libraries Web.

According to the standard dictionary, the word plagiarism is defined as “the practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.” This concept of plagiarism is one that is often frowned upon, and rightfully so. No one likes for their ideas to be stolen from them. However, sometimes writers have similar ideas, and while this does not give them an excuse to take ideas of other while claiming that they had the same ideas as whom they plagiarized, it can be quite a controversial topic. In fact, plagiarism has caused many writers to feel as though reusing and reiterating another writer’s ideas in a way that is suitable for their audience is inferior. Writer Jennifer Mott-Smith composed “Plagiarism Deserves to be Punished” in aim of shedding light on the reality of plagiarism, and the impact that society has upon this reality using several valid points regarding using the ideas of others. Likewise, further detailing Mott-Smith’s writing, author Malcolm Gladwell highlights the story of Dorothy Lewis and her experience with potentially faulty plagiarisms in his work “Something Borrowed.” Also, through their writings, authors Mott-Smith and Gladwell both argue that while in some cases plagiarizing is indeed faulty, it is very important that one consider the nature of the specific scenario.

Mott-Smith thinks that one’s own ideas are often based upon someone else’s opinions and thoughts, making it difficult to distinguish what idea or opinion came from which individual the author is/was in contact with. She also says that new writers sometimes use the phrases of other, more experienced writers in order to improve their own writing. Mott-Smith uses this understanding to highlight that “…not every verbatim reuse is plagiarism” (Mott-Smith 3). In addition to this, Mott-Smith also includes her stance that when a writer is accused of plagiarism, certain words that appear to have been plagiarized often correlate in the English language. Again, this is because often times, writers possess ideas in their minds that are not entirely original and may have been recycled from a different and sometimes more experienced writer. This means that sometimes writers may possess or adopt conceptions they use in their writing from these other writers or outside influences in general. Therefore, she claims that possessing a completely original idea may be impossible. She states that this is due to the fact that as writers, we “always write recirculated ideas that we have borrowed from others and reworked” (Mott-Smith 2). Here, the author reiterates her idea regarding a writer having a completely original thought that has never been heard of being very unrealistic. Furthermore, while writers sometimes develop the concepts they discuss in their writing from their own beliefs, opinions, or mindsets, even these are based upon things that they have been exposed to throughout their lives. For example, one’s person beliefs could have been affected by one’s family or friends, and therefore is not a completely original thought, as another older, more experienced writer most likely have been exposed to similar concepts or beliefs and included them in their writing as well.  

In his writing, Gladwell explains that there was a play created with a character in it that resembled a psychiatrist named Dorothy Lewis. Lewis was very unhappy to see that someone had used the events of her life for their own benefit. In fact, she believed that she out to file a lawsuit against them. There was an issue in a magazine written about Lewis that the play wright, Bryrony Lavery, had used to form her play. The writer of this magazine article was none other than Malcolm Gladwell. Lavery and Gladwell decided to sit and speak of the play, and while Gladwell understood why Lewis had been upset, there were many differences as there were similarities. Due to this, Gladwell states, “The ethical rules that govern when it’s acceptable for one writer to copy another are even more extreme than the most extreme position of the intellectual-property crowd; when it comes to literature, we have somehow decided that copying is never acceptable” (Gladwell). His words here further explain that society has had a great impact upon the opinions surrounding non-blame-worthy reuse of another writer’s ideas.

Both authors purposefully quoted Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig’s book “Free Culture,” where Lessig compares one reusing another writer’s ideas in their own writing to his recycling the idea of placing a picnic table in his backyard. Lessig also compares reusing the idea to simply taking someone’s picnic table out of their backyard and putting it is his own, which he implies is similar to faulty plagiarism in which the original thinker is affected. The significance of this comparison is crucial in order for one to understand the arguments Mott-Smith and Gladwell explain in their writing concerning the notion of plagiarism. This is because for one to reuse another writer’s ideas—while also citing the necessary sources—is not the same concept as “cutting and pasting an entire paper from the Internet or paying someone to write it” (Mott-Smith 5). Copying someone else’s complete (or incomplete)  paper from the Internet is faulty because of the fact that the writer is not incorporating any of their own ideas into the paper they are submitting. Similarly, paying someone to write it results in only one individual having benefitted–the person who received money. To make matters worse, the writer assigned with the paper not only turns in someone else’s thoughts and ideas, but also will most likely not receive a satisfactory score on this assignment. In addition, Mott-Smith states, concerning this, that unless one is “out-and-out cheating” (Mott-Smith 5), we should take caution before hastening to punish. She argues that in many scenarios of supposed plagiarism, a more appropriate response would be to allow the writer to comprehend and strengthen his or her source use.

Plagiarism is a very controversial topic in the world of writing, and it is an act that society considers blame-worthy regardless of the scenario. However, writers Jennifer Mott-Smith and Malcolm Gladwell believe that unless unmistakable cheating has taken place, teachers should be more careful before accusing or blaming a student of faulty plagiarism. Often, Mott-Smith argues, writers develop their ideas from the influence(s) of outside sources they encounter on a daily basis. In fact, according to author Lawrence Lessig, if writers use ideas based on outside influences, it is simply the idea that they are reusing for themselves, which do not directly impact the first thinker. It is vital that we, as writers and likewise humans, take the time to observe ourselves and the thoughts we personally possess–especially those we feel that no other individual can claim as their own–and ask ourselves where we first developed these ideas. Often, we learned them when we were merely children, naïve to much of the world we live in. It may have been our friends and family members that exposed these concepts to us in order for us to live accordingly, while always keeping these ideas in mind. As writers, these ideas are incorporated into our thought process and our understanding of the expectations of our readers and audience. If we didn’t rush to consider every reuse of ideas as blame-worthy plagiarism, we would be more open to accept that other individuals were exposed to similar concepts as we ourselves were. It should be something that is of means of comfort in a way, because the writer understands that he can read the writings of authors whose opinions he or she can relate to on a more personal level, and may also feel inspired to write about these ideas (while citing sources accordingly) without the worry of being accused of plagiarism.

Works Cited

Mott-Smith, Jennifer A. “Plagiarism Deserves to be Punished,” in Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, 247-252

Gladwell, Malcolm. “Something Borrowed.” The New Yorker, 15 Nov. 2004, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/11/22/something-borrowed

“A university student who is earning her bachelor’s degree” by World Bank Photo Collection is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

It is known that no matter how hard a writer tries, old writing habits are not easily dropped when trying to adjust to a brand-new curriculum. Most new writers have a tendency to use one specific writing habit in all writing environments including school, university and the common workplace. Elizabeth Wardle, author of “You can Learn to Write in General” calls this common writing mistake “writing in general”, and it affects new writers every time they step into a new field of study. Aviva Freedman and Christine Adam, authors of “Learning to Write Professionally: ‘Situated Learning’ and the Transition from University to Professional Discourse”, list out the opportunities that new writers can take to adjust to these new writing environments and improve their writing styles based on their given tasks. All three of these authors believe that writers can improve their skills through collaboration with their instructors at schools and Universities. In the common workplace, these three authors believe writers can improve their skills through the goals they set for themselves, along with observing the work of more experienced writers.

The main thing that new writers look for in a new curriculum is the context of the assignment. In other words, new writers need to know the prompt of the assignment and what they need to do to do the assignment correctly.  According to Elizabeth Wardle, things like the context of the course and collaboration among peers all “impact what writing is and needs to be in each situation” (Wardle 30). Without these things handy, students often have difficulty getting through coursework. Aviva Freedman and Christine Adam observed students completing a case study at home. They found that the assignment became a lot easier for the students once the instructor gave advice “in the context of the students’ struggles” (Freedman and Adam 404). The amount of collaboration and advice provided varies depending on the course. Sometimes the “writing is powerfully shaped and constrained by the instructor from the first meeting of the course” (Freedman and Adam 407), meaning that all the information that the instructor thinks the student needs is given to them at the very beginning of the course. No matter how much help is available, students can easily get help on improving their writing styles through collaboration with others.

Schools and universities aren’t the only places where writers can improve. In the common workplace, improving one’s writing style is much more difficult. According to Aviva Freedman and Christine Adam, the writer isn’t aware that the learning is even taking place (Freedman and Adam 410). This is because the learning occurs when the writer achieves their task and ends up helping others through their services. In other words, they achieve what Aviva Freedman and Christine Adam call their “writing goal” (Freedman and Adam 411). Each time this happens, the writer gains a little more writing experience having learned from their mistakes. They also end up receiving feedback from their mentors.

Gaining writing skills in the common workplace is no easy feat at the beginning. Aviva Freedman and Christine Adam explain that if students are looking for ways to become familiar with the tasks they will have to carry out at a common workplace, they should consider a mentor that provides them with tasks well below the “ability and professional orientation of a novice worker” (Freedman and Adam 412). When writers start off like this, new writers will observe more experienced writers at work.  They will begin to become familiarized with the context of their tasks, along with the challenges it will provide. Writers will observe the mistakes that more experienced writers make and learn from them. From there, writers will eventually warm up to not only to what is expected of them, but also to the work environment that was completely foreign to them before. Elizabeth Wardle stresses that in the case of a new working environment, new writers should always be aware of the context of their tasks and “on the lookout for examples [of what they are expected to do]” (Wardle 32). In other words, new writers should already know what they have to do to complete their tasks and look to more experienced writers for help if they need it.

Whether It’s in a classroom or in a workplace, all writers should try to improve their writing skills however they can rather than using, as Elizabeth Wardle calls it, one distinct “magic formula” (Wardle 32). Writers can collaborate with their instructors, mentors, classmates or co-workers to learn and improve from one another. Writers in the common workplace can complete their writing goals and gain experience in their field of writing each time they do so. Finally, writers can observe and study the work of more experienced writers before taking on more rigorous writing tasks themselves. Elizabeth Wardle concludes in her article that new writers should have been “immersed in the context” (Wardle 31) and have a new sense of what their writing style should be. Improving starts with the help of others. It’s up to the writer to ask for it.

Works Cited

Freedman, Aviva, and Christine Adam. “Learning to Write Professionally: ‘Situated Learning’

            and the Transition from University to Professional Discourse”. Journal of Business and

            Technical Communication, vol.10, no.4, 1996, pp. 395-427.

Wardle, Elizabeth. “You can Learn to Write in General.” Bad Ideas about Writing, edited by

            Cheryl E. Ball, Drew M. Lowe, West Virginia Libraries, 2017, pp. 30-33.

Writing is one of the most common skills used on a day to day basis. Writing comes with a purpose, to whom are you writing for? Why are you writing this? And so on. When you sit down with a pen and paper to begin writing you automatically set your mind to answer those few questions. Whether it’s writing for a creative purpose, writing to a colleague at work, writing to your boss and so forth. You can’t just write in general with no purpose. This is what Elizabeth Wardle the author of, “You can learn to write in general” argues about. This bad idea of being able to write in general creates an illusion that just any writing would fit any genre or any purpose, when truly that is not the case.

Writing in general is a difficult task to complete when you have no moral purpose for why you are writing. For example, if an author were to sit down and start talking about how college is a waste of time, the author must have an audience he/she is writing to.They can’t just sit there and write in general about the topic. They must have an audience to whom they are trying to convey this idea to and some evidence to back up their claim. It’s not like fictional writing where the author can just make up the story as they go, they must have concrete facts, most importantly must have a purpose. Another example, waking up one morning and deciding to start a business. You can’t just do that. You need to know an audience to whom you are selling a product to, why are you selling this product?, what is this product and what’s so good about it?
You must have some money already before making a business to be able to start the company, create the product you are promoting to sell, promote the product so people hear about it. Therefore, you can’t just start something with no purpose or audience, the same goes for writing in general.

Elizabeth Wardle, author of “You can learn to write in general”, suggests that “a better conception of writing is one in which we all remember (realistically) our own experiences learning to write in different situations”. (Wardle, 31). This gives the writer the flexibility to write for different situations, such as different purposes and audiences. Not all writing would fit into the same genre or the same audience because each creates its own purpose.“You can’t do it, because it can’t be done. There is no such thing as writing in general. Writing is always in particular.”(Wardle pg ,30)

Writing in different situations is the key concept in writing. The writer must gather new techniques for each purpose of writing. The author of “Elon Statement on Writing Transfer” says, “Successful writing transfer occurs when a writer can transform rhetorical knowledge and rhetorical awareness into performance”. Implying that the writer must have some sort of knowledge into what they are trying to write. This helps the reader be able to understand the key purpose of what the writing was for. Each writing created has its own main key of focus. You must be able to gain new ideas and techniques in order to be successful in new situations of writing. One can not expect that the same technique used before would be stable for another situation. Example, I can not write an essay for math and expect the same technique I used to score me a hundred in English. Another example could be, in a historic writing you use evidence from what happened in the time frame but in fiction since it’s made up you may not need any evidence, it wouldn’t be as crucial.

Lastly, it is most important to remember that writing does have a purpose. For whatever purpose the author is writing, they do not just write in “general”. As a writer one must recall what the purpose for their writing is and to whom they are writing to. Each writing must portray its own meaning, not all writing can be used for the same concept, genre etc. You can always grow from the previous writings but it can not be the same. Therefore, you can not learn to write in general, but you can learn to write with a purpose and audience.

Work Cited:
– Ball, E. Cheryl; Loewe, M. Drew. Bad Ideas About Writing. Wardle, Elizabeth. “You can learn to write in general”.Pp.30-33.
-Elon University.”Elon’s statement on Writing Transfer”.Incorporated,2013.Pp 1-9. http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/academics/teaching/ers/writing_transfer/Elon-Statement-Writing-Transfer.pdf